Evaluation of monograph selection in a health sciences library.

This article reports on an evaluation of recent monograph selections in a small academic health sciences library. Actual use of each new book was determined from date-due slips. Data were analyzed by broad subject, discipline, and number of uses. The startling result was that more than 60% of recent selections had been used little or not at all. To determine factors affecting use, the author examined aggregate data, used intuition, and assessed the raw data in more detail. Recommendations made to management were approved and implemented. The study bolstered confidence that it is possible to select materials with the highest potential for use and to depend on remote access for other needed works. It is suggested that other health sciences libraries undertake such studies and question the need to strive for comprehensive collections.

Factors influencing research productivity among health sciences librarians.

Secondary analysis was performed of data collected in 1989 from a random sample of members of the Medical Library Association. Results show that about half the sample had at least one publication; academic health sciences librarians were much more likely than hospital librarians to have published. Almost half the sample had taken formal courses in research, but only a small percentage had taken continuing education (CE) courses in research. Institutional support services for research were most available in academic settings. The combination of institutional support, CE training, and research courses explained 31.1% of the variation in research productivity among academic librarians; these factors were less important in hospitals and other institutional settings. The authors suggest that health sciences librarians working outside academia should seek support for research from sources outside the employing institution.

The use of jargon in medical school libraries.

The public services divisions of forty-seven medical school libraries participated in a survey to document jargon used by library staff and users in referring to information sources in the health sciences. The survey yielded 624 unique instances of jargon, 54% of which were acronyms of initialisms. Examples of problems created by the use of jargon are given and the importance of the librarian as a facilitator of communication, even in the presence of automated information systems, is discussed. Implications of the study for novice librarians are suggested. The body of jargon appears to serve as an effective cross-professions communications device.

A glossary of medical library jargon.

Based on submissions from forty-seven geographically representative medical school libraries, the authors have compiled a glossary of jargon used in medical school libraries in the United States. This glossary will serve as a unique reference tool of particular use to the novice medical librarian.

Mechanization of Library Procedures in the Medium-Sized Medical Library: XIV. Correlations between National Library of Medicine Classification Numbers and MeSH Headings.

The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of correlation between National Library of Medicine classification numbers and MeSH headings in a body of cataloging which had already been done and then to find out which of two alternative methods of utilizing the correlation would be best.There was a correlation of 44.5% between classification numbers and subject headings in the data base studied, cataloging data covering 8,137 books. The results indicate that a subject heading index showing classification numbers would be the preferred method of utilization, because it would be more accurate than the alternative considered, an arrangement by classification numbers which would be consulted to obtain subject headings.